From: John B (discwuzit@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:57:36 MDT
>From: Brian D Williams:
>>From: Harvey Newstrom <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com>
>>>Brian D Williams wrote:
>>> The Kyoto protocol/treaty is useless precisely
>>>because it
>>> excludes countries like China, arguably the worlds
>>>largest
>>> polluter/producer of greenhouse gases, not to
>>>mention the rest
>>> of the socialist nonsense concealed in the treaty.
>>I think curtailing our damage to the environment is
>>important.
>>That is why I oppose letting some nations off the
>>hook.
>We agree on this. But in a nation where every other
>car is an SUV
>how many people are paying anything other than lip
>service to the
>idea?
Not to mention people writing emails on systems
powered by coal. Or nuke. Or (insert power generation
nemesis of choice).
The problem is that we don't have viable commercial
alternatives, as I see it. Wind power has yet to prove
itself, and solar is not regarded as viable on a
commercial scale (perhaps wrongly, perhaps not -
depends on the person viewing the reports).
The newer high-efficiency hybrid cars out there are a
step in the right direction, IMO. However, I do NOT
expect them to become a common sight unless there are
significant government subsidies - little cars don't
fit into American's self-image as it now exists.
Instead, the 'power' of the SUV (big, hulking, and
ridiculously expensive) is what DOES fit.
*shrug* Perhaps another meme to slay?
-snip-
>>Similarly, the current curtailing of individual
>>rights in the U.S.
>>to fight terrorism implies that rights are merely
>>luxuries
>>afforded when there are no dangers. But whenever a
>>serious threat
>>to the country occurs, we abandon our previous
>>political system as
>>unworkable and revert to more restrictive regimes.
>The phone system was opened to the FBI during the
>Clinton
>administration under the guise of the "digital
>telephony act", and
>these same liberals didn't say a peep.
Fear is a powerful motivator, and creates oportunities
that those who're interested in such can't afford to
miss. If we have another massive terrorist event in
the US (God forbid, and which I expect), I'd put money
down that what we have now is going to pale in
comparison to what happens.
>>There is something wrong with any plan that only
>>seems to work
>>when times are easy. If the system breaks down or
>>needs to be
>>abandoned when vital stakes depend on it, it is not
a >>good system.
>>People who are willing to abandon such schemes
really >>don't
>>believe in them in the first place.
>I agree.
As do I - however, there DOES have to be a point when
you cut your losses. Liberty is great, as is life.
Which is more important to you? I suspect that the
great majority of Americans will vote for life rather
than liberty. This may be clouded thinking on our
part, but then again, we get the government we
deserve. *sour grin*
>The simple fact is that there is not a consenus on
>global warming
>in this country, and until there is these plans are
>unworkable,
>especially one sided plans like the Kyoto protocol.
Until there's a clear pointer that global warming
exists (and last winter and this summer may do that),
and that there's a credible scientist pointing at car
emissions as the primary culprit, there won't be a
public consensus IMO.
This is what government is SUPPOSED to do - take the
long view. However, it's not what we Americans have
done in the long term analysis - we tend to vote out
those giving us the bad news, and vote in those with
good news.
Not always, but bloody often.
-John
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:08 MST